State v. Pakhnyuk
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
CHUTICH, Justice.
This appeal raises two issues. First, we must determine whether a defendant forfeits a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence that is based on a statutory interpretation argument when he fails to raise it in the district court. We conclude that the forfeiture rule does not apply to such a challenge.
Second, we consider how to apply the intent element in subdivision 1(a) of Minnesota's criminal interference-with-privacy statute, Minn. Stat. § 609.746 (2018). Specifically, we must determine whether a criminal defendant charged with interference with privacy under…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Jones v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Barnhart v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Jama v. Immigration and Customs EnforcementSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Lockhart v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Porto Rico Railway, Light & Power Co. v. MorSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Jan Kuklenski v. Medtronic USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2025
- Sean Michael Wocelka v. State of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- Brian Matthew Nash v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- Brian Matthew Nash v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- Christina Berrier v. Minnesota State PatrolSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.